Still, we sometimes long for a familiar human face. And when former Ars staffer Kurt Mackey invited me to his office to talk about the telepresence robots that his company, Mongo HQ, bought for the work-from-home crew, I jumped at the chance to take them for a spin. You can see the results for yourself in the video below. Kurt also penned a nice reflection on the advantages and disadvantages of working with a mostly telepresent staff, which you can read here.

Enlarge/ Skip the drudgery of commuting like the common folk: from the comfort of your home office, you can be present at work by controlling the Double through the Chrome Web browser or an iOS app.

Megan Geuss

Mongo HQ decided to invest in robots from a company called Double Robotics, but there are many more on the market that you can choose from. Some are bigger, some are smaller, some are specialized for certain types of work (like patient monitoring for doctors). Double Robotics' “Doubles” cost $2500 and don't include the second, third, or fourth generation iPad that you need to mount on the robot as the primary vehicle for communication. But in our brief testing, the machinery seems worthy of its price tag. The Double can last eight-hour days and doesn't require all that much assistance from the people physically present in the office. It can telescope from about six feet tall to about four feet for faster driving, and it handles uneven floors well.

Probably the nearest competitors to the Double are Suitable Technologies' Beam and its budget Beam+. A Beam telepresence robot works for eight hours of active use and 24 hours of standby, and it comes equipped with a 17” screen and a six-microphone array that “cancels echo and reduces background noise”—no iPad necessary. Still, each Beam will also set you back a whopping $16,000, although Suitable Technologies offers a lease program. Beam+ is 15-grand cheaper, but it only lasts for two active hours. The model has a 10” display and a four-microphone array, and it will start shipping this summer. Preorders start at $995 (discounted from $1,995). Neither the Beam nor the Beam+ can change height.

There are other options as well. Anybots' QB Avatar comes equipped with a smaller screen, can telescope from six feet to two feet, and “only” weighs 32 lbs (the Double weighs about 15, including the iPad). It will also set you back $9,700, unless you go for Anybots' rental program.

Or you could go with a VGo, which will cost you upwards of $6,000 depending on whether you want to add on the ability to adjust height, want the extended battery, and so forth. VGo seems to be primarily marketing toward healthcare and education industries, and it supposedly lasts longer than any of the other telepresence robots—12 hours before needing a charge.

As you can see, there's no shortage in the market for telepresence robots, but Double Robotics seems to have a corner on it because its product is affordable and simple. However, with all the press these robots are getting, it won't be long before someone catches up with Double Robotics. And when that day comes, your office will be full of oh-so-quiet coworkers on wheels—rolling around, spying on the links you're clicking on reddit, and then rolling away.

Me and a friend saw this at CES and managed to get 2 of these robots talking to each other. The fact that we were witnessing that they were talking in real time to each other through a robotic interface over spotty wifi was amazing, even moreso if you consider that they could've been across the world. But they probably were more likely in the same room in the private booth behind the demo area, which just made them troll-y. But that's ok, because we were trolling by having 2 robots talk to each other and it was all in good fun.

I’m not sure that I understand the point of these devices. The video wouldn’t work for me, which may contribute.

The article mentions two potential use-cases: in medicine, and in the office.

In the office, there are already options to videoconference between two computers (or other devices). Mounting your communication device to a set of wheels is neat, but seems slightly pointless.

In the hospital setting, cameras mounted within the room seem like an easier and cheaper option. This type of setup is unusual, but it’s already being trialed in some locations in an effort to create remote assistance teams. Data indicates that patients feel more comforted by human presence and touch than by robots. Lastly, how will the robot sanitize itself or “gown up" between rooms? Just because it won’t be touching a patient directly doesn’t mean that it won’t be touched, get sneezed on, or bump against furniture in the room.

The only scenario that I thought this would be applied to wasn’t mentioned: store floor salespeople. While stores still need people to be physically present for certain tasks, you could theoretically have these robots rolling around the aisles with someone on the other end to speak to customers.

Basically, it’s a neat idea and a neat blending of technologies. I’m just not sure what problem it addresses.

As they point out in the article, it's awkward and difficult to give a fair share of attention to a (fixed) camera. When the student is telepresent though (after the excitement wears off) they're just like any kid.

I work from home, so do some of my colleagues (not the majority). The main hesitation here is that I'm not really keen on having a camera on.

That said, I do see the utility of video, and I definitely see the utility of having a camera on the other side that I can move around. I have been virtually present at any number of meetings where the view of the presentation was less than ideal. We've gotten better about it, though.

It very much depends on the kind of person you are, though. I like working this way. I've had colleagues who just needed the regular social contact of being present in an office. They moved on to other jobs. I don't think we have had anyone who simply wasn't productive remotely, but it also hasn't been people working the kind of jobs where they could just slack off and have no one notice. E.g. people on commission are motivated, remote or not. And deadlines are deadlines.

This is very timely as I want to construct a DYI 'telepresence' bot minus the moving parts, I think.Currently I'm thinking to start small, perhaps rPi + camera and maybe just my face printed out, so very ghetto solution but should be pretty cheap just to see if it works out?I just want to gather how the others in the meeting will feel about this so don't want to waste thousands upfront...

I only need this for a meeting once a week but it will save me from flying over 4000 miles for that meeting...

This is very timely as I want to construct a DYI 'telepresence' bot minus the moving parts, I think.Currently I'm thinking to start small, perhaps rPi + camera and maybe just my face printed out, so very ghetto solution but should be pretty cheap just to see if it works out?I just want to gather how the others in the meeting will feel about this so don't want to waste thousands upfront...

I only need this for a meeting once a week but it will save me from flying over 4000 miles for that meeting...

"Minus the moving parts" you could just have a co-worker put an iPad on a stand and run FaceTime. Or an Android tablet with a Google Hangout.

NCIS Los Angeles has used one of these to present the "ever-present boss randomly popping up even though she's in her office" scenario. It drives the other office workers insane... and I can't blame them. The robot is small enough that it's not noticed until the boss uses the bot's speaker to start micromanaging while being so lazy that she never even leaves her office.

I keep expecting them to drape a black sheet over the thing to cover the camera, but so far they haven't -- not that I've seen.

Oddly enough, I saw that thing on Tech Toys 360 just before seeing the link to this earlier. For what it's creators wanted - eyes on site in China- it is probably cheaper than constantly flying there and back.

Wouldn't really work for us, as it would freak out too many users (heart attack class freakouts). Then our clients would crap themselves immediately then insist we restrict it's access to areas not containing any confidential information, which is pretty much everywhere (including, sadly, the bathrooms) except a couple of closets, defeating any usefulness they would have for us.

Totally looking into quad copters though. Tough finding tiny ones that can carry a camera and a dropable payload (mostly marshmallows, but occasionally a thumb drive) and be near silent.

NCIS Los Angeles has used one of these to present the "ever-present boss randomly popping up even though she's in her office" scenario. It drives the other office workers insane... and I can't blame them. The robot is small enough that it's not noticed until the boss uses the bot's speaker to start micromanaging while being so lazy that she never even leaves her office.

I keep expecting them to drape a black sheet over the thing to cover the camera, but so far they haven't -- not that I've seen.

Of course not, it's advertisement. They're targeting assholes who both want to terrorize their employees, but don't actually want to leave their chair.

Well for cases where the only thing that is required of you is to be able to look around something and to talk & listen to other people/tele-presence robots it could be useful. not so much if you also need to manipulate objects. Definitely worth it for those who would have to travel to other countries for meetings and similar situations but I think a lot of people can be put off by having the human element replaced in such a way. Perhaps is more about our current mentality than the actual utility of the robots. Interesting stuff.

Well for cases where the only thing that is required of you is to be able to look around something and to talk & listen to other people/tele-presence robots it could be useful. not so much if you also need to manipulate objects. Definitely worth it for those who would have to travel to other countries for meetings and similar situations but I think a lot of people can be put off by having the human element replaced in such a way. Perhaps is more about our current mentality than the actual utility of the robots. Interesting stuff.

Well for cases where the only thing that is required of you is to be able to look around something and to talk & listen to other people/tele-presence robots it could be useful. not so much if you also need to manipulate objects. Definitely worth it for those who would have to travel to other countries for meetings and similar situations but I think a lot of people can be put off by having the human element replaced in such a way. Perhaps is more about our current mentality than the actual utility of the robots. Interesting stuff.

So you want one of these stomping through your office?

Nah I rather have my boss pay me whatever that thing costs. I'll definitely be much happier with a pay raise than a bad-ass looking substitute for my presence.

Well for cases where the only thing that is required of you is to be able to look around something and to talk & listen to other people/tele-presence robots it could be useful. not so much if you also need to manipulate objects. Definitely worth it for those who would have to travel to other countries for meetings and similar situations but I think a lot of people can be put off by having the human element replaced in such a way. Perhaps is more about our current mentality than the actual utility of the robots. Interesting stuff.